Language Policy
Bernard Spolsky (2007), one of the most eminent scholars of language policy, defines this concept as being made up of three inter-related, but still independent, components:
- Practice: the actual language practices of the members of the speech community.
- Values/Ideology: the values assigned by members of the speech community to each variety and variant and their beliefs about the importance of these values.
- Management/Planning: the efforts by some members of a speech community who have or believe they have authority over other members to modify their language practive, such as by forcing or encouraging them to use a different variety or even a different variant. Ex. establishment of a national language
Annotated Bibliography
Shohamy, E. (2012). Language Policy Hidden Agendas and New Approaches. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Building upon earlier work that helps to debunk the idea of static languages and national identity, Shohamy posits that rather than declared policy statements, true language policy is enacted through a variety of devices that are used to perpetuate language practices in covert and implicit ways by affecting de facto policies. She provides a convincing argument that observing the effects of these language devices and their de facto policies is in many ways more fruitful for understanding and interpreting the real language policy of a state than simply considering its language policy statements.
Spolsky, B. (2007). Towards a Theory of Language Policy. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 22 (1), Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/wpel/vol22/iss1/1
Bernard Spolsky, one of the most influential voices within the sociolinguistic realm of language policy, outlines in this working paper the beginning of a theory of language policy and management. In order to do so, he considers the interplay of speech communities, the practices, beliefs, and management of language policies, and the internal and external influences that could affect such policies. He concludes the piece with a consideration of the language of schools, and uses educational language policy as an example of how this theory of language policy and management might be applied in this realm.
Weinstock, D. (2014). The complex normative foundations of language policy. Language Policy, 13(4), 317–333. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-014-9326-y
In this article, Weinstock posits that language policy consists of "the range of measures, coercive and incentival, that states enact in order to modify the linguistic repertoires and linguistic patterns of behaviour of individuals so as to make them reflective of what is considered to be the optimal value or set of values operative in the area of language" (p. 318). He argues that the state must negotiate between different, and often competing, normative considerations when creating language policies. He discusses the interests of three groups in particular: the individual, the state, and humanity, and argues that they have fundamentally conflicting interests when it comes to language policy, in that they are concerned with its utility and effect on identity, its ability to homogenize, and its possibility to preserve linguistic diversity, respectively, in an attempt to engage with and challenge the underlying philosophical assumptions of liberal democratic states.
Building upon earlier work that helps to debunk the idea of static languages and national identity, Shohamy posits that rather than declared policy statements, true language policy is enacted through a variety of devices that are used to perpetuate language practices in covert and implicit ways by affecting de facto policies. She provides a convincing argument that observing the effects of these language devices and their de facto policies is in many ways more fruitful for understanding and interpreting the real language policy of a state than simply considering its language policy statements.
Spolsky, B. (2007). Towards a Theory of Language Policy. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 22 (1), Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/wpel/vol22/iss1/1
Bernard Spolsky, one of the most influential voices within the sociolinguistic realm of language policy, outlines in this working paper the beginning of a theory of language policy and management. In order to do so, he considers the interplay of speech communities, the practices, beliefs, and management of language policies, and the internal and external influences that could affect such policies. He concludes the piece with a consideration of the language of schools, and uses educational language policy as an example of how this theory of language policy and management might be applied in this realm.
Weinstock, D. (2014). The complex normative foundations of language policy. Language Policy, 13(4), 317–333. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-014-9326-y
In this article, Weinstock posits that language policy consists of "the range of measures, coercive and incentival, that states enact in order to modify the linguistic repertoires and linguistic patterns of behaviour of individuals so as to make them reflective of what is considered to be the optimal value or set of values operative in the area of language" (p. 318). He argues that the state must negotiate between different, and often competing, normative considerations when creating language policies. He discusses the interests of three groups in particular: the individual, the state, and humanity, and argues that they have fundamentally conflicting interests when it comes to language policy, in that they are concerned with its utility and effect on identity, its ability to homogenize, and its possibility to preserve linguistic diversity, respectively, in an attempt to engage with and challenge the underlying philosophical assumptions of liberal democratic states.
Additional Resources to Annotate:
- Baločkaitė, R. (2014). On Ideology, Language, and Identity: Language Politics in the Soviet and Post-Soviet Lithuania. Language Policy, 13(1), 41-61.
- Hatano, K. (2013). Makiguchian Perspectives in Language Policy and Planning. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 12(1), 50-60.
- Pavlenko, A. (2011). Language rights versus speakers' rights: on the applicability of Western language rights approaches in Eastern European contexts. Language Policy, 10(1), 37-58. doi:10.1007/s10993-011-9194-7.
- Ricento, T. (2006). Americanization, Language Ideologies and the Construction of European Identities. In C. Mar-Molinero & P. Stevenson (eds.), Language ideologies, Policies and Practices: Language and the Future of Europe, pp. 44-57. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
- Ricento, T. (2009). Introduction to Language Policy : Theory and Method. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.